 | | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(snip everybody) Here's the thing, Dave: you're totally right. But there's no point in worrying about it any more. There seems to be a consensus that it's OK to bully Eric on LUGNET. I've (URL) protested it before>, but apparently the admins and the (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Special deals for lawyers, too! I love it:-) lol (...) And the number one thing LUGNET is about is.... (at least, me) Camaraderie. But hey, I'm into pyro, too! (URL) (I'm in some of those pics!) JOHN (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) :sigh: (URL) and (URL) (...) Are you saying he's being accidentally mischievous? (...) No, you probably can't. (...) You chose to butt in with the adversarial stuff. I figured you liked it that way. :shrug: (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) I'm not saying it's an injustice that requires severe punishment. It's your perspective that you need to work on. The facts-- Person A, in a position of authority, changed links on the Technic sidebar. The *only* links that were changed were (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John Neal wrote: snip (...) snip (...) FIREWORKS!!! i LOVE fireworks!!! its what I DO !!!! Chris www.thepyroguys.com 1. then what is the number one thing lugnet is about? (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Yes, Ross, you made that perfectly clear. What you haven't made so clear is WHY you think that for no apparent reason. (...) Because I have no evidence to the contrary. You are obtuse. (...) Is that why you know so much about him-- because you (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - Do we need a newsgroup on LUGNET?
|
|
(...) Now that made me smile! :) And if I may be so bold--we do have a forum here for all things JLuggy, and it has the added benefit of contributing to high mirth for *most* members in this group-- (URL) (1) Dave K 1- well, not affiliated with JLug (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) He could also be still reading. (...) Why do you suspect that? (...) (URL) Oh I doubt it>. Of course that could just be someone impersonating him. (...) I never claimed to know about his Lugnet reading habits. (...) Or even moot. Yes, I do (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - Do we need a newsgroup on LUGNET?
|
|
(...) (URL) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - Do we need a newsgroup on LUGNET?
|
|
(...) Heh... when we can get that site back online, that is. And since LF will probably no longer have substantial forums... that's actually a possibility. ;) But I was REALLY thinking we need more discussion here about BZPower and all things (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Only because it is the only other forum which I know you use, that's all. Really. (...) It wasn't my intention to insinuate that. I was making a comparison based on tone. Style. Manner. That sort of thing. (...) My only point is that a JLUG (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) He's not necessarily in the "still reading" subgroup category. He could've been just popping over to LUGNET when he got "pinged" by a regular reader, or after a major event like an ILTCO convention. Which is exactly what I suspect is the case. (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) I'm not sure why you're bringing Jlug into the discussion here. If I could set the fut to lugnet.org.jlug right now, I would. But now that you have, I say you're arguing from ignorance. There's a far greater sense of camraderie there than I've (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) I think what Dave is driving at is that even though your actions may technically be with the TOS, it is a question of civility. Pushing people's hot buttons and watching the fireworks isn't what LUGNET is about. Lugnet is about laughing with (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) OK. Let's try this from the other direction, kiddies. The populace that still reads Lugnet is a group of people. It contains many subgroups, for example: The people that still read lugnet.org.scibrick The people that still read a few groups (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Well, my point is that you have no reason to think that. (...) You know my neighbor, and where we live? I chose my neighbor precisely because you don't know him. You don't know anything about him. Just as you don't know anything about any (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Who said I didn't expect it? (...) Show me where I asked for a 'bye'. If I've breached the TOS, I'll take my lumps. I don't consider anything that's happened here a 'malicious' provocation. 'Mischievous' at worst. And your repeated claims that (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Because I DO. (...) I'm sorry for being so obtuse - I was simply pointing out that asking them is one other way to know (assuming you receive / believe the answer). Standing and looking over their shoulder while they read is another. Do you (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) But you admitted that one doesn't necessarily follow from the other, so I don't know why you'd think THAT. (...) Why don't you stop being obtuse and answer the question? I want to know another way you seem to THINK there is of knowing this (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: malicious behavior
|
|
(...) Who in their right mind would provoke a 'known entitiy' and not expect the 'known result'--isn't that the very definition of insanity? I'm all for a debate about the scalability of transgressions, if you wanna go down that road. That said, an (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
